Romney greets the conservative new media Romney campaign responds
posted at 4:20 pm on December 9, 2011 by Jazz Shaw
Mitt Romney’s journey in seeking the GOP nomination for 2012 has had – to put it mildly – more than a few twists and turns. But now, even with Newt Gingrich surging in the polls, he’s getting close to the finish line when voting begins in January. This would be the ideal time to jump out there and try to light a fire under the conservative wing of the new media, as I’m sure his campaign knows. So it was a perfect time to schedule a conference call and take questions from some of the heavy hitters on the starboard side of the political ship. Right, Mitt? Right? Matt Lewis reports:
As you probably heard, some Mitt Romney surrogates hosted a conference call today to attack Newt Gingrich. Because Romney is attempting to win a Republican primary — and cast Newt Gingrich as unacceptable to conservatives — you probably assume that center-right journalists or conservative bloggers got to ask some questions, right?
Wrong. Here’s the list of reporters and media outlets who were permitted to ask questions:
JOHN DICKERSON, CBS NEWS
MARK HALPERIN, TIME
LLOYD GROVE, THE DAILY BEAST
EVAN MCMORRIS-SANTORO, TPM
DAVID CORN, MOTHER JONES
PHIL RUCKER, WASHINGTON POST
Were there any questions for Hot Gas? Sadly… no. But this isn’t just sour grapes, as Lewis notes. This is simply mind boggling, bad judgement. Da Tech Guy hones in on the problem.
Stupid isn’t the word here. You are trying to make the case you are more conservative than Newt Gingrich and you not only exclude Conservatives from questions but you take questions from flipping Mother Jones and Talking Points Memo? This is an insult to every conservative news outlet, new media site and blogger out there.
And people complained about the way Herman Cain treated friends, but perhaps the Romney Campaign doesn’t consider conservatives friends.
There’s a word here I’m struggling for. It’s along the lines of “outreach.” If you want us to take you seriously, you might field some of our questions. Then again, maybe Mitt thinks Mother Jones and Talking Points Memo will give him the key endorsements he needs to win big in the GOP primary.
For you Tweeters… insert the #headdesk hashtag here.
UPDATE: The Romney campaign responded to Hot Air with the following:
The Daily Caller piece you cite in your post is wrong.
Tonight (as we do with every call) we sent out a media advisory to our regular press inviting members of the media to join the call. We use a phone conferencing system to manage these calls.
Participants who join the call are then invited to ask a question after the opening comments by pressing “1” on their phones. Question are fielded on a first come, first serve basis. We do not screen out any media organization. Whoever notifies the operator by pressing ”1” first gets to ask their question first.
On tonight’s call we answered a every single question in the queue. Every reporter – conservative, liberal or nonpartisan – who wanted to ask a question got to ask one. Organizations that were not called on either didn’t press the number “1” or never joined the call in the first place.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 4 5 6
He never did that stuff. I was there in MA during his tenure. He catered to democrats and democrats still did not like him. Then he tucked his tail and fled and thought he could be president.
Flapjackmaka on December 10, 2011 at 10:32 AM
Which begs the question; are conservative press folks getting invited in the first place. This response is an attempt to suggest that everyone was invited and conservatives simply chose not to participate – but it doesn’t explicitly say that they *were* invited.
So, were they? Were HotAir folks informed that this call was occurring?
It seems unlikely that ‘conservative’ media folks were invited and *none* wanted to ask a question…
Midas on December 10, 2011 at 10:32 AM
The fact remains, he quit. He knew he would lose, and he didn’t run again.
ddrintn on December 10, 2011 at 10:33 AM
“The President is a nice man and he means well” has been a usual line for him in the debates. We need someone to RIDICULE him. Gingrich may not be perfect but “food stamp President” is an excellent line.
Flapjackmaka on December 10, 2011 at 10:34 AM
resorting to name calling because your false argument is being questioned with facts. Nice.
Here is the full quote from the book in which you take such delight:
Yeah – its a much nobler course to stand on the sidelines and recite left-wing talking points. lol
gatorboy on December 10, 2011 at 10:38 AM
Newt is capable of hitting Obama until he breaks. Mitt, not so much.
Talk about golfing too much is just a catty remark by guys in the country club. Food stamp president actually stings.
That is why a few points difference in polls vs. Obama a year before the election do not matter.
WhatNot on December 10, 2011 at 10:41 AM
What about those who didn’t pay their own way? I’ll ask again: what was the federal contribution before RomneyCare, and what was that contribution AFTER? Also: would RomneyCare be a good model for other states? And if not, why not?
ddrintn on December 10, 2011 at 10:41 AM
Was it his 34% approval rating or his overweening presidential ambitions? He essentially quit in his third year — he was out of the state pressing palms and raising money. He’s been running full-time for five years.
rrpjr on December 10, 2011 at 10:41 AM
Must be the new revised “I must get elected” edition. I have the hard cover large text and it says “What me and my team had embarked on in Massachusetts is what I think the entire country should adopt. We can accomplish the same thing for everyone in the country.”
There is also:
Flapjackmaka on December 10, 2011 at 10:43 AM
Most of those costs would have increased anyway as a result of an aging population and increased health care costs.
But again, repeal EMTALA if you want to deny the federal governments ability to force those costs onto the states and then motivate the states to try and get back the money the federal government takes from them. Either block grant back the funds or reduce the tax burden on the state.
csdeven on December 10, 2011 at 10:44 AM
ok - here’s the answer to my question since it must have been to difficult for you to research.
And here was Obama’s reaction to this ridicule by Romney.
gatorboy on December 10, 2011 at 10:44 AM
@ rrpjr
He has beeen running a good 7 years already. A half a year after Romney care was passed, he basically gave up and went out of state to try to accomplish what his father could not.
Flapjackmaka on December 10, 2011 at 10:45 AM
Model for the nation (states as individuals), not a NATIONAL MODEL (IE Obamacare).
Big difference. The proof is that Romney has NEVER supported a FEDERAL mandate.
Gingrich has.
csdeven on December 10, 2011 at 10:46 AM
Deflection. Weak. And blathering on about EMTALA is not helping your case. If RomneyCare was the bee’s knees as you’d have us believe, those costs would not have risen to the point at which the feds would have to bail them out. So, what was the federal contribution before and after RomneyCare? There’s your measure of success.
ddrintn on December 10, 2011 at 10:47 AM
Took him awhile to go after the golfing thing. Good job on Romney’s part, every horse eventually crosses the finish line I guess.
Here is how much I care
Flapjackmaka on December 10, 2011 at 10:48 AM
Wow you were up for a while. How did that corralling kittens thing end up? Tough job it looks like.
Bmore on December 10, 2011 at 10:49 AM
“Paying what you can afford” is not going to reduce the actual cost of medical care. Who will pay the difference? If it’s the hospital, they will have to make their paying customers (insur. cos.) pay more. If it’s the government, they have to make their paying customers pay more. If the cost were divided among the actual people that get the services, we cut out the middle man and let the free markets settle on a price we all can afford.
mike_NC9 on December 10, 2011 at 10:50 AM
ddrintn, you are an idiot. How can you not see the genius of an exbusinessman who has been running for political office for two decades. HE SAVED THE OLYMPICS A DECADE AGO MAN!! What do you want
/sarc
Flapjackmaka on December 10, 2011 at 10:50 AM
I have a ? for you if that would be okay. I never understood why Romney wanted to govern a state that to run in he had to modify his positions so drastically. Can you shed any light on the reason a conservative would want to do that. Was he hoping to flip them?
Bmore on December 10, 2011 at 10:52 AM
Gotta love Drudge, he has got Romney doing his little stare on the headline. Cant wait for tonight. Gingrich may have warts but this debate wont be the same as when everyone ganged up on Perry.
Flapjackmaka on December 10, 2011 at 10:53 AM
Why did he not run in Utah or New Hampshire or the 40 other states he has houses in?
Flapjackmaka on December 10, 2011 at 10:54 AM
LOL, yeah he’s been running since the Clinton administration, and has only won once, with less than a simple majority at that. But yet this is Mr Electability.
ddrintn on December 10, 2011 at 10:55 AM
Some predictions;
*GOP turnout for primaries/caucuses will be down
*GOP donations accross the board, Prez/RNC/RGA etc. down
*GOP voter entusiasium down
Why
*Lack of conservative principled candidates
*Lack of a candidate (prez) w/charisma
Solution
*New conservative candidates needed
If not
The anti Christ obama gets re-elected!
Danielvito on December 10, 2011 at 11:04 AM
If Romney loses Iowa and NH, can we agree he’s done and will never be president? Or does anyone think he has a chance despite those two early losses, if it happens?
Freeloader on December 10, 2011 at 11:12 AM
No, it’s about you trying to rewrite history about your habit of calling people “haters” and then having the fracking gall to call someone else out for doing that. Next – I do not “whine”. I expressed skepticism about the accuracy of this story at the onset (and gosh, if I wasn’t right to be skeptical), but this is oh so rich coming from a bitter Palinista who can’t stop “whining” about the slings and arrows of Palin’s outrageous fortune, still to this day turning every thread into a Palin thread. It’s beyond pathetic.
It’s a fact,
Jackjackass. I got “pissy” with Palin when she deserved it, such as when she used a technique you seem to like, where she cast a wide net and with zero specificity implied all the GOP candidates were guilty of “crony capitalism” . So yeah, guilty!Thanks for admitting to your epic ethical failings born out of a juvenile need for revenge.
Buy Danish on December 10, 2011 at 11:15 AM
I rearely use the term “haters”. actually. I’ve always preferred “Palin-deranged” and the like.
It’s all you do.
…and we get pissy with Romney when he deserves it. Deal.
You’re welcome. Karma’s a beeeotch, I know.
ddrintn on December 10, 2011 at 11:20 AM
Oh yeah, that should be “rarely”. Before you jump on a typo again to show your massive intellect.
ddrintn on December 10, 2011 at 11:24 AM
One of the most foolish posts to date from you…pro abortion to advance in Mass? Ummmm, it had already “advanced” he did nothing to stop it, except make it “more legal”.
Pal, saying that Romney Care could not have happened without the federal govt buying into it, without having the feds sponsor it, isn’t “left-wing” talking points, they would love to point that out.
Romney Care is/was federal sponsored, and that’s the problem, he has not problem forcing the feds into our lives.
right2bright on December 10, 2011 at 11:37 AM
Romney not only supported it, he created it in Mass…..RomenyCare was federal sponsored, it would have never been launched without the feds money…even for you, your post is a stretch.
right2bright on December 10, 2011 at 11:41 AM
They must have been invited because the complaint was about not being permitted to ask questions.
tbrickert on December 10, 2011 at 11:43 AM
First post, and may I say, bravo. Your ability to condescend while barely addressing the substance of a person’s post is truly exquisite. Stand up and take a bow, you and your circle of fellow troglodytes must be so proud.
Buy Danish has already said he’s been feeling pissy over this rather slip-shod attempt at a smear, and while I can understand being a bit tweaked, I personally don’t think the show of frustration does his argument much good. If I were him I would’ve taken some time away from Hot Air to just calm down and then come back to address the situation.
However, his show of frustration is preferable to watching you bloviate, ousting yourself as little more than some ninny with his head firmly shoved up his buttocks when it comes to anything Mitt Romney. Really, there’s a lot of things to complain about when it comes to Romney, but picking this particular hill to call out others as whiners and to try to throw out what I can only assume to be what you think of as clever sarcasm is a particularly bullheaded move on your part, considering that this hill of yours is basically sand until further notice (although the stunning silence of the Hot Air commentators doesn’t exactly inspire confidence).
WealthofNations on December 10, 2011 at 11:47 AM
In case some of you missed this from earlier in the thread…THIS is what the conference call was about..
Oh, and BTW…THIS backs up that report…it’s from Drudge…
lovingmyUSA on December 10, 2011 at 11:52 AM
None of us received an invitation, as I wrote in an earlier post, although it’s possible it got lost in the avalanche of e-mails we got from the open-registration issue. None of us were on the call. Hope that clears up your question.
Ed Morrissey on December 10, 2011 at 11:52 AM
Agreed. McCain used the same line about Obama being an ok guy and would make a good president and look how far that got him.
HellCat on December 10, 2011 at 11:53 AM
So those that are saying this is a “smear job” against Mittens…hmm…hypocrits much?
lovingmyUSA on December 10, 2011 at 11:55 AM
During the 2008 campaign, Mitt was the most conservative out the bunch after Fred Thompson & Guiliani dropped out. But that was a different time. Today, Mitt is the least conservative; Newt is 100% more Conservative. This conference call just proves that Mitt doesn’t deserve the nomination. When the establishment and Repubs in Government pump up Mitt and talk down Newt, it shows me that my vote will be opposite of what they think. Go Newt 2012!
Jacamina on December 10, 2011 at 11:56 AM
Thanks for the response. As someone who was apart of the new registration, I can see it getting lost. But if there was no invite, that is a different matter.
tbrickert on December 10, 2011 at 12:01 PM
I’d say that there’s a difference between latching onto a story that hasn’t been entirely confirmed and then attacking another candidate based on a history that is both extensive and widely accepted as being factual.
Similar to the difference between drawing attention to Romneycare and his position changes and… well, this story.
WealthofNations on December 10, 2011 at 12:01 PM
I find it endlessly hilarious that, in all the previous debates, people were practically salivating at the prospect of a candidate attacking Mitt Romney. Now that Romney returns fire, suddenly we all seem to remember Reagan’s 11th Commandment?
Personally, I don’t care. Our candidates are going to be attacked harshly in the general election anyway. As the omnipotent Q would say “If you can’t take a little bloody nose, then maybe you should crawl back under your bed”.
Also, Newt Gingrich being 100% more conservative than Romney? I’m not sure if you forgot your /sarc/ tags or if you’re sadly serious.
WealthofNations on December 10, 2011 at 12:04 PM
WealthofNations on December 10, 2011 at 12:04 PM
Ruiner on December 10, 2011 at 12:42 PM
Take a listen to conservative passion.
Schadenfreude on December 10, 2011 at 12:43 PM
Rationalizing support for Romney forces one to torture political logic. “Indies” can only “decide” an election when a base is secured. To count on indies at this point is a tacit admission of weakness. Romney should be closing the sale now with the base (he’s been running for a nearly a political generation), but instead he’s flailing. Indies are skittish and impressionable, and will follow the strong horse.
rrpjr on December 10, 2011 at 12:58 PM
No one that I know will be supporting Romney in the primary because we all seem to agree that there is a powerful lack of authenticity surrounding him and his campaign. The best way that I can put it is “that he is not my type of guy.” I don’t agree with Michael Barone that Romney’s problem in part stems from his lack of 60s era hipness and awareness, but I do agree with him that Romney is corny as hell. I’ll probably wind up supporting Santorum in the primary if he somehow survives until California otherwise I’ll be supporting Gingrich, baggage and all. However, neither I nor others I know will have any problem voting for Romney in the general if he happens to win the nomination.
Spirit Crusher on December 10, 2011 at 1:21 PM
Polish that Romneyturd until your fingers fall off, he still won’t shine.
Better yet, keep searching for just the right insult to get people you called idiots for two years to vote for your guy. I like that part the best!
SurferDoc on December 10, 2011 at 1:27 PM
Thanks a lot for providing this information, Ed. The plot thickens.
Up until now, I was willing to give the Romney camp the benefit of the doubt, largely because it seemed insane of them to have put out such a quick and indignant response if they were in the wrong. Ed’s information puts the focus squarely back on the Romney campaign.
So, Romney campaign:
Why was Hot Air not invited on the call while small left wing blogs like Talking Points Memo were?
If this is a misunderstanding because the invitation “got lost in the avalanche of e-mails we got from the open-registration issue”, you should be able to clear this up quickly by providing a copy of the invitation.
Who was invited on the call? A full list of the invitees would be very informative at this point.
If few conservative media outlets were invited, your response seems deliberately deceptive and Hot Air, Daily Caller and Datechguy deserve an apology for your attempt to mislead them.
Hot Air,
Please continue to follow up on this story, at least until we get a list of the invitees. I think it is a big story if, as it appears now, the Romney campaign is inviting left wing media like Talking Points Memo, Mother Jones and The Daily Beast and not inviting conservative Media like Hot Air, Townhall.com, Daily Caller, Washington Examiner, National Review, Weekly Standard, American Spectator, and Washington Times. It is even more disgraceful if they are then trying to cover up their mistakes with deceptive responses.
cool breeze on December 10, 2011 at 1:28 PM
FWIW, I’m not quite that exercised about it. They did get our contact info after this exchange, and have promised to include us in future invitations. This is more indicative of a tone-deafness than a scandal of the first or second order, but if they’re willing to address that deficiency (and I think they are), then I’m willing to see how they do going forward.
Ed Morrissey on December 10, 2011 at 1:34 PM
Hey, if the dunce cap fits.
WealthofNations on December 10, 2011 at 1:34 PM
Ed,
Thanks again for the response. I agree that the call itself seems to be more indicative of tone-deafness than scandal. It is still pretty staggering tone deafness. Talking Points Memo ???
The Romney response, on the other hand, still strikes me as deliberately deceptive. I would still really like to see the full list of invitees.
It’s not so much the crime as the cover up.
cool breeze on December 10, 2011 at 1:44 PM
Even better, if you poke the Romney turdpolishers just a little bit, they will insult the people they need to support their guy even more! And they don’t even wonder why his numbers don’t improve…
SurferDoc on December 10, 2011 at 1:56 PM
There’s nothing to stop Hot Air from finding out why it was not invited, if in fact that’s the case. I doubt that the Romney campaign would not invite Hot Air just because of its obvious bias in favor of Freddie Mac Gingrich.
Basilsbest on December 10, 2011 at 2:01 PM
Funniest thing, you see. There are a small group of people I don’t feel any harm in insulting: the willfully ignorant, the flat out ignorant or the hypocritical.
Really, Mitt needs you and folks in your… ‘demographic’ like JFK needed a bullet in the head. Frankly, the fact that you don’t support him helps me think a little more highly of him.
So thank you for helping me, as you say, ‘polish the turd’. You’ve been a great help.
WealthofNations on December 10, 2011 at 2:07 PM
See? Works every time.
SurferDoc on December 10, 2011 at 2:25 PM
Eh, I suppose people will take victories where they can get them.
WealthofNations on December 10, 2011 at 2:44 PM
I believe Redstate has also said they got no invite either. I don’t think it was an issue with the registration.
sharrukin on December 10, 2011 at 2:50 PM
Whaddaya know. Open registration let in a couple more pompous ass Mittbots to keep Buy Danish company.
I’ve felt pissy about a lot of “attempted smears” on quite a few non-Romney political figures lately, while Mittbots seem to have their heads firmly up their buttocks over anyone not named Mitt.
I try to keep my comments short and sweet, which is preferable to using 3 or 4 paragraphs of faux eloquence to say “you’re a poo poo head!”
Which just may be why Romney’s flailing around now with his self-important 18% sliver, which doesn’t seem to grow appreciably over time.
ddrintn on December 10, 2011 at 3:24 PM
Truly the great one.
Bmore on December 10, 2011 at 3:24 PM
What’s even more hilarious is that some people were wanting candidates to take Romney on on matters of policy, while the Mittbots want Mitt to smash Gingrich over the number of wives he’s had. If we want to compare Gingrich’s actual political career and its accomplishments with Romney’s, I don’t think that’s a challenge that Gingrich would shy away from. And I’m not fan of either Gingrich or Romney.
ddrintn on December 10, 2011 at 3:32 PM
Team Romney’s so out of touch they probably don’t know Hot Air (or BigGovernment or PJM or TH) even exist. It seems though they’d at least have invited a pro-Romney site like NRO to ask a question. And what’s all the talk about “invitations” anyway? If Romney were a little more in tune, he would be reaching out to these outlets without all the silly “let’s investigate to see who actually was invited to ask a question; and those that weren’t invited need to prove that they indeed were not invited” crap.
ddrintn on December 10, 2011 at 3:48 PM
As at least three of us tried to point out earlier in this thread this morning, “If Romney were a little more in tune” he would just release the list of “regular press” they invited, or another conservative site beside HA or Redstate (who have both stated already that they received no invites that they are currently aware of) should come forward with the invite they received.
Hopefully if this were just a tone dead oversight on the part of Romney’s camp they are now setting about correcting it. However, if this was a dissemble on their part it doesn’t bode well for how well he’s going to relate to today’s conservative movement.
Difficultas_Est_Imperium on December 10, 2011 at 4:28 PM
MOTHER JONES MITT? ? ?
Reallly? How about MOTHER F – I better stop there.
jpmotu on December 10, 2011 at 4:37 PM
Once again, this is hilarious coming from you – the vengeful child who worships an Alaskan Saint, never has anything positive to say about anyone, and contributes nothing other than vacuous opinions. If you were paying attention you’d know that I have said many positive (and admittedly some negative) things about Newt from the start. He is my second choice, but I think he’s a very risky general election candidate. I have defended him on those occasions when I felt he was being unfairly attacked – just as I have done for Sarah Palin and every other candidate. As I have repeatedly said, I have one goal and only one goal: Defeating Barack Obama.
Another thing is undeniable – I have never “smeared” a candidate with unsubstantiated rumors or allegations, misreported stories, or anything of the sort. On the rare occasion I make a factual error, I correct it. (Unlike you!) I provide facts and information and direct quotes in context to back up the points I make, linking to sources which refute the continuous stream of misinformation (aka “unadulterated crap”) perpetrated by commenters (like you) on a regular basis.
Buy Danish on December 10, 2011 at 6:15 PM
FTR, this thread (Ultimate heart-ache: Palin supports the stimulus?)proves that I am an objective commenter, who strenuously defends Palin against misreported stories and give her credit she was due. Some excerpts:
Lengthy note to Allah here.
I could provide many more examples, but I have things to do, and I am not paid to do this so it’s not worth it for me to find an encyclopaedic refutation of your asinine claims at this time. Just take a moment to let it sink in. Maybe it will help you wake up a little. Growing up will require a greater effort.
Buy Danish on December 10, 2011 at 6:48 PM
Just trying to see if I can figure out how to do quotes. One of the new users. Anyways, that exchange cracked me up.
stampi on December 10, 2011 at 7:32 PM
Two can play that game.
ddrintn on December 10, 2011 at 7:44 PM
LOL…by the way, I used to think that CW’s the bunny boiler here, but you’ve wrested the title. Congrats. Every time I read one of your screechy harangues I see Glenn Close.
ddrintn on December 10, 2011 at 8:31 PM
I’m going to go ahead and ignore the various menagerie of insults and complaints you’ve thrown together and just focus on this one. Dude, if you honestly think that comparing these two’s policy histories will result in Newt being victorious, I have three words for you.
Bring it on.
Personally, while I don’t find Gingrich’s personal life to be attractive, I don’t think we need to go punching him here in order to win. The people who won’t vote for Newt Gingrich because of his somewhat odious personal life have already been factored in.
On the other hand, his serial flip-flops, the number of which makes even Romney’s indiscretions against conservatism seem like a minor nuisance, and his lobbying for Freddie Mac and the drug companies on behalf of Medicare Part-D (and who knows what else) are real viable means of attack that will be effective, no matter how deeply you shove your head into the ground.
Also, thanks for the warm welcome. I can really feel the love.
WealthofNations on December 11, 2011 at 12:11 AM
It’s not a game, child. You have repeatedly accused me of being a “Palin Hater”. I have never called you a “Romney hater” or a [fill-in-the-blank with other candidate's name] “hater”. I provided a link to demonstrate what lengths I go to to remain fair to candidates and to Hot Air. Sorry that you are having so much trouble understanding this simple point.
Buy Danish on December 11, 2011 at 11:38 AM
Hey why ddrintn taking so much abuse today ?? :(
cableguy615 on December 11, 2011 at 8:10 PM
Comment pages: « Previous 1 … 4 5 6